About

MEMORANDUM
[1st Edition]SUBMITTED TO THE DE-COLONISATION COMMITTEE
(COMMITTEE OF 24)

To:

The Chairman,
De-Colonisation Committee (Committee of 24)
United Nations
Geneva/New York Headquarters.

MEMORANDUM: Submitted on behalf of all the dependent and colonised people of Manipur representing the ethnic and indigenous people, namely, the Meiteis, the Nagas, the Kukis-chins for granting and restoration of independence and de-colonisation of the State of Manipur from the present colonial and hegemonic Administering Power the India.

HON’BLE CHAIRMAN,

0.1. We, the undersigned representatives of the Revolutionary People’s Front, a front of the national liberation movement in the State of Manipur which is currently a constituent State of the Republic of India, furnish the following facts, based on historical, political, socio-economic materials as well as legal and constitutional materials for your consideration and urgent international supervision of the colonisation and dependence of the people of Manipur by the colonial power of India with the help of a colonial occupation army, which continues the ongoing repression, suppression, torture, extra-judicial murder and subjugation of the people of Manipur under a permanent colonial process and colonisation in different forms. The facts of colonisation and subjugation are furnished below under relevant headings:

1. HISTORICAL MATERIALS

1.1. The State of Manipur, which lies in the latitude range of 23°83″ and 25°68″(North) and in the longitude range of 93°03″ to 94°78″ (East), is one of the earliest ancient States in the continent of Asia, including the Indian sub-continent. This ancient Asian State was known by different names to different countries. That is ‘Poirei Meitei Leipak’ or ‘Kangleipak’ to the indigenous people of Manipur or Meiteis; ‘Kathe’ or ‘Ponnas’ to the Burmese; ‘Hsiao Po-io-mein’ to the Chinese; ‘Cassay’ to the Shans; ‘Moglai’ to the Cacharis and Bengalis and ‘Mekle’ to the Assamese (as well as to the British in the 18th century) in the pre-Christian period. Its location is identified with places within the jurisdiction of Tugma, Trigliption, Mareura and Kirrhiadinn as per the sources of Ptolemy. Themselves the Manipuris knew the State by as many as 22 names in different ages and at different times.

1.2. The State formation was completed in the early Christian era, when as many as seven principalities amalgamated themselves to constitute the earliest Meitei State, which territorially fluctuated but extended beyond the present territory. The earliest settlers were the ancient Meiteis of the present valley area, the Nagas who settled in the hill areas and the early Kuki- chins who came subsequently. The early Meitei State which is presently known as Manipur is a State of three major ethnic group of Mongoloid race, namely, (i) the Meiteis (Manipuri proper), (ii) the Nagas and (iii) the Kuki-chins. There was a centralised Constitutional Government since 429 AD, according to a renowned Meitei Scholar late Oinam Bhogeswar, whose works are found in plenty in Manipuri, i.e., Meitei language. The history of Manipur had been documented in a royal chronicle known as ‘Cheitharol Kumbaba’ (33 AD to 1950 AD). The English translation is available in the Indian Office Library, London, and other Archives of the United Kingdom which still preserve a large number of historical documents, treaties and other official records pertaining to the relation of the State of Manipur with the British Government since 1762 AD till 1949 AD. These materials, including local and native, may be closely examined as historical records by the De-colonisation Committee in order to form an objective and positive view of the people of the State of Manipur for at least three centuries. So that the official and colonial perspectives of the Administering Power of the Indian State alone may not form the sole basis for any objective appraisal.

1.3. A Centralised Constitutional Government had been functioning in the early State of Manipur invariably from 1100 AD when the Meitei Monarch Loiyumba had promulgated political Constitution known as ‘Loiyumba Shinyen’, the English translation of which is enclosed here with as an Annexure.

1.4. The aforesaid Constitutional Government continued from 1100 AD till the international conflict arose in between the Manipuris and the Burmese in the 18th and 19th centuries AD when the Manipuri king Pamheiba alias Garibaniwaj invaded Burma in the 18th century several times with as many as 30,000 warriors. A large part of the Manipur territory was later ceded by the colonial power of India to Burma (now Myanmar). The Kabo (or Kabow) valley that had been a part of the Manipur territory following Manipur’s conquest of the territory, had been a part of the Manipur Territory till the early part of 19th century. And the Burmese gave annual revenue of Rs. 5000/- to the Government of Manipur till Indian occupation of Manipur in 1949. The Government of India, which had annexed Manipur in 1949 unlawfully and unconstitutionally, ceded the Kabo valley to Burma (present Myanmar) after signing a secret Indo-Burma Treaty in the 1950s. The provisions of the secret treaty are not yet made known to the people of Manipur as well as to the citizens of India.

1.5. After Burmese military occupation of Manipur for seven years in the period from 1819 to 1826, complete sovereignty was restored to Manipur following a bilateral treaty —Treaty of Yandaboo, signed in 1826 in between the British Crown representative and the representative of the Burmese Government. By this Treaty, the Burmese power in Asia and the imperial Colonial power of the British Crown accorded multilateral international recognition to the independence and sovereignty of the early State of Manipur. In 1935, the British set up in Manipur a Political Agency, which was supposedly an Ambassador in that period and it continued for a long time. The British power and the Manipur power had continued the friendly relationship by mutually opening political Agency. The Manipur power opened Political Agency of Manipur in the British Territory at Lakhimpur (Cachar) as well as at Calcutta. The Anglo-Manipuri friendship was established for the first time in 1762, when a Treaty had been signed between the representative of Maharajah Jay Singh (alias Bhagyachandra) of Manipur and Mr. Harry Verelst Chief of the Chitagong Factory on behalf of the British Crown on the 14th September, 1762 (Annexure enclosed).

1.6. There was mutually protective Indo-Manipuri arrangement in between the Manipur power and the British power when the British Viceroy had a summit meeting with Maharajah Chandrakrity of Manipur in August 1874. By this arrangement in between the Manipur and the British powers, both the contracting parties had agreed to assist one another in the mutual and reciprocal interests of both the powers. The relationship broke down in 1891 March, when the aggressive British army had initially been defeated by the Manipuri army on 24.3.1891 and the Manipuri army had finally been defeated in April, 1891.

1.7. Subsequently, the British had military occupation in the State of Manipur till 1907 by totally disarming the Manipuris to the last man. However, the Queen did not annex the State of Manipur as part of the British Colony to the British territory for the several reasons (Annexure enclosed). The British Parliamentary Proceedings on the subject would be found in the Hansard of U.K. in June and July 1891. Even after the defeat of Manipur, it had not been annexed nor colonised by the British although the British Crown considerably interfered in the local administration of Manipur.

1.8. From the Manipuri perception, it was a political intervention in Manipuris political sovereignty. Manipur had been labeled as a Native State in the sub-continent of India from the British perspective. Thereafter, in fact, from the Manipur perspective, Manipur had never been a constituent of India, as this Asian State of Mongolian race and Mongolian population is completely different from the other so-called Native State of the Indian sub-continent which is truly the realm of the Aryan and Dravidian racists. Further, the leaders of the Indian freedom fighters and the Congress Party led by Aryan leaders like M.K.Gandhi, J.L. Nehru and Sardar Patel had consistently defined in the records the Native State of India as a blood relation State which means an Aryan or Dravidian State. Since Manipur is a Mongolian State, it had never been a part of Ancient State of the present British created India. It is quite clear that no Mongolian State could ever be considered as a constituent State of the Aryan and Dravidian peoples who are racially integrated.

1.9. Manipur King Maharajah Bodhachandra Singh had acceded only three Subject of defence, external affairs and communications to the then Dominion of India as per the agreement or Treaty signed on 11.8.1947. It was duly supported by another earlier agreement known as the Standstill Agreement with the British Crown representative in the then Dominion of India before the enforcement of Indian Independence Act 1947 on the 15th August 1947. Since the agreement was signed by the Manipur Maharajah with a political entity, pre-Independence India which did not have treaty-making power as on 11.8.1947. And on 2.7.1947, the validity of the Accession Treaty is doubtful and questionable since India became legally independent and sovereign only on 15.8.1947, following the Indian Independence Act, 1947. Manipur became independent as per Section 7(1)(b) of the Indian Independence Act, 1947 (which is enclosed herewith as annexure). By a proviso of Section 7(1)(b) and (c) of the aforesaid Act, whatever prejudicial relation Manipur had with the British Government before Independence had been denounced by implication when Manipur adopted its own Constitution for popular democratic Government of the State with a constitutional monarch.

1.10. In a number of Privy Purse cases and similar other cases, the Supreme Court of India had closely examined the political status of the Native State of India in the pre-1947, 1947 and post-1947 period before their merger to India. It had consistently as well as categorically held and decided in its rulings given since 1954 till 1993 that the Native State is fully independent and sovereign in 1947 during the relevant period (Annexure enclosed). Therefore, it is evidently clear and undeniable that Manipur, which was considered as Native State even from the British perspective, had become fully independent and sovereign on and from 15.7.1947. Further, its political status was an independent and sovereign Asian State, which retained its independent and sovereign political status, till 14.10.1949, although it did not join the United Nations. The independent and sovereignty of Manipur had been strengthened when Manipur adopted its own political constitution, namely, the ‘Manipur State Constitution Act, 1947’ (Annexure enclosed). And an elected popular and responsible Government had been installed in the form of Manipur Legislative Assembly constituted by members elected by universal adult-franchise and a council of Ministers to aid and advise the Maharajah as the constitutional head.

1.11. Later in 1949, the Manipur King or Maharajah Bodhachandra Singh had been kept under Regulation III and ‘any other means’ which empowered military siege, arrest and captivity of Manipur King by the Indian army at Shillong from the 17th to the 21st September, 1949. The Manipur Maharajah was physically and mentally forced to sign Manipur Merger Agreement on 21.9.1949 under duress and coercion (annexure enclosed). The Manipur Maharajah had formally communicated to the representative of the Government of India at Shillong that he was no longer functioning as a plenipotentiary of Manipur since the political powers had been totally transferred to the people of Manipur. The Maharaja being a constitutional monarch did not have any power to sign any effective valid Agreement or Treaty with the Government of India. In the past, the Government of India had interfered in the Manipur administration by forcing the Manipur Maharajah to appoint one Major General Rawal Amar Singh of colonial Indian army as a Dewan of the State, which the post had been manifestly extraneous and unconstitutional, as per the provisions of the Manipur State Constitutional Act, 1947.

1.12. The Government of India had incited and instigated the so-called Manipur Congressmen — the Aryan fifth columnists in Manipur, to persuade and press the Manipur Administration to merge the State of Manipur with India. However, the majority of the people’s representatives of the 53 members assembly had opposed Indian annexation of Manipur while only 13 congress Deputies (members) who had been in the microscopic minority welcomed it. Besides, the people of Manipur in general had opposed the annexation by holding public meetings on 3.8.1949, 25.8.1949, 8.9.1949, and on several other occasions to 14 October 1996. The popular resistance to India’s annexation of Manipur State had been rendered by the militant guerrillas even before Manipur was subsequently annexed. The Communist Party of Manipur in that period had maintained ties with the Communist Parties of Burma (now Myanmar). It had the militant upsurge against the Indian imperialism since 1949 onwards till 1950-51; however, the colossal Indian occupation army suppressed the movement by repressive means.

1.13. The Manipur Nationalist Party in the 1950s had demanded the revocation of Manipur Merger Agreement with India. Several representatives of various parties including Shri Yangmaso Saiza, a Naga from Ukhrul District of Manipur who later became a Chief Minister of Manipur, resisted the annexation of Manipur. Even after the Indian annexation of Manipur, popular movements have ceaselessly been continued. Although the methods of protests had been partly democratic and partly militant, in the later 1960s, national liberation movement had come into existence in Manipur to free it from Indian subjugation and colonisation.

1.14. In late 1960s, national liberation movement of Manipur was seeded. Thereafter, militant resistance had been physically and openly been started by the Meitei State Committee, which was closely followed by the Revolutionary Government of Manipur (RGM). After the dismantling and disbandment of RGM, the Revolutionary People’s Front (RPF the political wing of the People’s Liberation Army of Manipur) was formed on 25 February 1979 and started operating for the liberation of Manipur from the Indian occupation army and Indian Colonialism along with several insurgent organisations. In1978 there had been full scale armed resistance all over the State against the Indian occupation army. The national liberation movement of Manipur has been consistently opposing the colonial Government of India on political terms and had been struggling against the occupation army of India on military terms since the time of Indian annexation of Manipur in 1949 till today.

II. ON CONTINUATION OF THE SOVEREIGN STATE OF MANIPUR

2.1. The Sovereign State of Manipur continues to exist since the Christian era, despite unlawful political and military occupation. Therefore, India and its intervention in the Manipur is a political process. The nature of the Sovereign State of Manipur is presented as follows.

2.2. Firstly, the sovereign status of Manipur State had been recognised bilaterally when Manipur entered the Indo-Manipuri Friendship Treaty in 1762 AD (Annexure enclosed).

2.3. Secondly, the political sovereign and independence of Manipur had been officially recognised by both the Burmese Government and the British Government as per the provisions of the Yandaboo Treaty, 1826 (Annexure enclosed).

2.4. Thirdly, after the military defeat of Manipur by the British army in 1891, the British Government did not annex Manipur to its empire (Annexure enclosed); this itself gives testimony to the unremitting independence of Manipur.

2.5. Fourthly, despite the British and Indian interference in Manipur affairs, Manipur became fully independent and sovereign on 15.8.1947 vide Indian Independence Act, 1947 (Annexure —Indian Supreme Court rulings 1954 to 1993).

2.6. Fifth, although Manipur had entered into the Treaty known as the Instrument of Accession on 11.8.1947 Manipur did not transfer more than 3 subjects to the Dominion of India. At that time India was not an independent country of making the Instrument of Accession signed on 11.8.1947 (Annexure enclosed) in between Manipur and Dominion of India. It had clearly given prerogative right to Manipur to retain its sovereignty and independence.

2.7. Sixth, Manipur State Constitution Act, 1947 (Annexure enclosed) was in operation at the time of signing of the Merger Agreement between the Manipur Maharajah (king) who lacked the capacity and authority to enter into any treaty with any power or the representative of the Government of India on 21.9.1949. Since he was not the plenipotentiary of the independent and sovereign state of Manipur of which he was only the constitutional head.

2.8. Seventh, the people of Manipur had not deputed a representative duly elected by the people of Manipur to the then Constituent Assembly of India. Although from the Indian Foreign Policy and colonial perspective, a foreign national was considered as representative to the Constituent Assembly of India. Any representation of Manipur people by a person of the colonial country professing to represent the people of Manipur is quite inconceivable, preposterous and accordingly null and void as he lacked the capacity and jurisdiction. Hence, Manipur cannot be brought within the colonial constitutional framework of India, since it was not a part to it.

2.9. Eighth, no referendum or plebiscite of the people of Manipur had ever been held concerning the annexation or merger of Manipur to a foreign Country — the Republic of India.

2.10. Ninth, the installation of a colonial government on 15.10.1949 in the soil of Manipur did not in terms repeal the Manipur State Constitution Act, 1947. Although the colonial government without having any jurisdiction whatsoever had passed a colonial order under Notification No, 219-p Gazette of India, Ministry of State, dated 15.10.1949. It illegally and unconstitutionally dissolved the popular Ministry as well as the popular Assembly (the parliament) of Manipur, on the strength of the null and void Manipur Merger Agreement.

2.11. Tenth, there is a widespread popular awareness among the people of Manipur that the Manipur Merger Agreement, 1949, as stated above is null and void and unconstitutional from the point of view of Manipur State Constitutional Act, 1947. Moreover, it is in the backdrop of contemporary norms of the International Law. The National Convention on the Manipur Merger Issue was convened by tri-ethnic platform of Manipur from the 28 to the 29 October 1993 in the capital city, Imphal. The Convention has unanimously resolved in plenum that the impugned Merger Agreement with India in 1949 is illegal and unconstitutional, considering the entire process and circumstances that led to the Merger Agreement (Annexure enclosed).

2.12. Eleventh, the UN Security Council in similar circumstances had proclaimed similar annexations illegal, void, and untenable. The Security Council declared annexation of Goa by India as illegal (vide S/5033, SCOR, 988th meeting, 18 December 1961). It acted against Iraq under Security Council Resolution No. 660-678 for annexation of Kuwait in 1991. The UN precedents, contemporary International law, Jus Cogens and Vienna Convention on Law of Treaty clearly regard annexation of Manipur by India in 1949 after two years of the independence of the two States falls in line with and is comparable to the Kuwait precedent in 1991, and among others.

2.13. Twelfth, considering the historical materials and the records, documents and treaty which are enclosed herewith, the sovereign and independent political status of Manipur which had been continuing for at least 2,000 years remains under suspension with the intervention of Indian Colonial Administration, under Indian colonial political process and by the physical occupation of the Indian colonial army.

III. SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL COLONISATION

3.1. The people of Manipur have been deprived of their inalienable birth-right to determine their political and socio-economic status on their own due to Indian colonial process, subjugation, alien and racist national oppression.

3.2. The pre-dominantly Mongoloid population of Manipur has been subjugated by the Indian racist and colonial regime which represents only the blue blood of the Aryan and Dravidian races. The administering power, i.e., the Indian colonial regime has never appointed any indigenous people of Manipur who are of Mongoloid origin to any important position whatsoever in the Indian colonial regime. Tthe people of Mongoloid origin are treated as subjects and subjugated race only to be ruled by the occupation army. Since 1949 onwards till today, not a single day has ever passed in Manipur without the repressive measures taken by the Indian colonial army by torturing, insulting or extra-judicially murdering the indigenous people of Manipur. A number of repressive laws or laws of legitimating State Terrorism including the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958, Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 and several other similar draconian laws have been systematically introduced and enforced in the State of Manipur in order to subjugate the people of Manipur and incapacitate them from determining their own political destiny (Annexure enclosed). The UN Human Right Committee and global NGOs have denounced them as incompatible with the International Bill of Rights.

3.3. Under Section 4 of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958, the Armed Forces of the Union of India have been empowered to kill anybody on suspicion or out of hatred without any judicial process. Under this Acts, even after large-scale extra-judicial killings, the Indian Armed Forces are made immune from judicial process. Besides, this has enormously encouraged the Indian Armed Forces to precipitate and heighten their extra-judicial torture and execution of the Mongoloid people bordering genocide of the Mongolian races in Manipur.

3.4. It may be added that the Aryan and Dravidian racists in the Indian colonial regime have been guided by sacred religious scriptures like the ‘Manusmrity’. In all its chapters authorised Aryan and Dravidian racists, specially from high castes, to execute or torture women, infants and the raced who are not of Dravidian or Aryan origin. The people of Manipur are not Hindu Sudras but Mongolians. From their in-built mental perspective, they cannot help but to conceive every people of Manipur as Sudra, who is to be physically tortured and slaughtered. Hence, from the perspective of the Indian Colonial Army, whenever they physically execute any Mongoloid people they conscientiously assume that they have performed a scared religious duty and rite to fulfil the scriptural mandate of their racist ancestors. It may be recalled that the ‘Arthasastra’ of Kautiliya — the equivalent of a military manual of colonial Blue Books, gives religious sanctity to he suppression and wiping out of smaller nations and countries in order to establish Indian imperialism and colonialism. Therefore, the Indian Colonial Army and the Indian colonial political rulers have no alternative other than cherishing a heritage of conquering smaller nations and physically executing people who are not of Aryan or Dravidian origin. The British Colonial Power, however, did not have such a mandate from their Bible. Indian Colonial Regime and the Indian Colonial Army operated in such a sophisticated and orchestrated way that the International Community cannot easily understand or recognise the entire consequences of the overt and covert Indian colonialism.

3.5. The colonial development process and the colonial economy had not been helpful to the people of Manipur. Not a single major industry much less an important establishment has ever been established in Manipur even for colonial objectives. Whereas several hundreds of Crores of Rupees have been spent apparently on paper maintained for the record in order to refuel and recycle their colonial apparatus. Quite a few families in Manipur are also used as colonial subsidiaries. The economic condition of the average people of Manipur specially those in the hill areas has not improved even up to the level of subsistence. People survive on grassroots in the Manipur Hill areas because of colonial economic process.

3.6. We have living testimony of the socio-cultural colonisation of the indigenous people of Manipur by the casteist and racist socio-cultural apparatus of India.

3.7. In sum, the national liberation movements in Manipur have strongly endorsed the view that Manipur has socio-economically and politically been exploited by the Indian colonial regime beside the political and military subjugation of the people of Manipur since 1949 till today.

3.8. Proxy elections are helped by spending Crores of Indian Rupees in order to perpetuate colonialism through quislings, puppet regimes and fifth columnists under proxy election process by way of bribing the illiterate people and misleading the illiterate electorate. The Indian colonial regime can in no way justify the electoral process whatsoever, since the people of Manipur cannot exercise their independent political will and resolve their destiny at the gunpoint of the massive racist Indian colonial army and several thousands of plain-clothes spies. Democratic world shall not give credence to election at gunpoint.

IV. NATIONAL LIBERATION MOVEMENT OF MANIPUR

4.1. The national liberation movement of Manipur has been physically and psychologically resisting the Indian colonial regime, since the time of Indian annexation of an independent and sovereign Manipur in 1949. For several reasons, Manipur could not bring this abominable colonial process on the agenda of the De-Colonisation Committee of the UN, as the people are under the siege and no communication whatsoever could be independently sent outside Manipur, and because the Indian colonial net-work intercepts any mail or postal service or any complaint, to the advantage of the colonial army. Any independent opinion expressed by the media has been specially controlled by the puppet regime of the administrating power. The colonisation of Manipur, therefore, has not reached the knowledge of any International Body whatsoever outside Manipur. The Indian Racists have controlled the media like the best of the Nazi Goebbelsian media has suppressed the information of the movement from reaching the outside world.

4.2. With the establishment of the United Nations in 1945, the UN should have accorded the territorial integrity and political sovereignty of any country or nation, big or small on several occasions. The United Nations had been found to take steps in order to maintain territorial integrity of countries, which existed at the time of establishment of the United Nations in 1945. Manipur became fully independent and sovereign in 1947, but the United Nations for one reason or another could not come into the picture to save the small State of Manipur from Indian occupation/annexation. Manipur did not lodge a complaint to the United Nations or its appropriate authority, as it was not aware of the technicalities and procedures involved therein.

4.3. The world appreciates the role of the UN when the United Nations has endorsed its programme of granting or securing independence to colonised/subjugated countries and people since the 1960s. The right to self-determination has been incorporated in the United Nations Charter also, besides the Resolution of the United Nations General Assembly on the subject. The people of Manipur through the national liberation movement have been urging for the exercise of their ‘Right to self-determination’. So that the people of Manipur by themselves can determine their own future destiny and implement their future economic and socio-cultural plans successfully without any colonial intervention from any outside power whatsoever.

4.4. It may also be noted that following the ‘Western Sahara’ Case in which 15 judges of the International Court of Justice had decided about the right of Western Sahara to determine its independent political status. The ICJ has juridically re-affirmed the ‘self-determination’ rule. The ICJ has given a classic judgment that inspite of the legal ties that Western Sahara had with both Morocco and Mauritania, Western Sahara can exercise its right to self-determination (International Court of Justice Report, 1975). The same judgement has established invariable its applicability to the case of Manipur, inspite of Manipur’s illegitimate ties with the foreign administrating power, i.e., the Indian Colonial Regime.

4.5. It is understood that even after illegal annexation, a State could be re-established since International Law has declared annexation or aggression in any form as completely wrong and illegal as it contravenes the International Law and Jus Cogens.

4.6. On the annexation of Kuwait by Iraq, the United Nations Security Council has very clearly given the signal that illegal annexation of a country is untenable and the Security Council has restored the independent status of Kuwait under Resolution Nos. 660 and 661-678 of the United Nations Security Council by resorting to military action under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. Manipur annexation is a case of manifest aggression, resulting in illegal occupation by the Indian colonial regime; hence, there is no good reason to justify the aggression by the Indian occupation army.

4.7. The contemporary International Law clearly denounces terrorism of one kind or another and illegal use of force. The contemporary International Law also gives complete legal validity to the use of any ‘available means’ so that the national liberation movement is enabled to exercise the right of the people or the colonised country to self-determination. International Law has clearly differentiated between illegal use of force for the sake of any sort of terrorism and the legitimate use of force by the colonised country and subjugated people for self-preservation of the independence against the colonial army and regimes. Manipur national liberation movement cannot be equated to terrorism.

4.8. The national liberation movement in Manipur has not asked for separating a square inch of the territory of the Government of India as it existed in 1947, before the annexation of Manipur to the colonial administration of India. Hence, the Government of India cannot find out a reason whatsoever to level the national liberation movement of Manipur as a separatist movement. People of Manipur want to honour and disclaim the exact territory of India as on the 15th August, 1947, the date of its independence, which in no way includes an inch of the territory of Independent of Manipur.

4.9. Besides, it is on record that following the UN Declaration of the granting of independence to colonial people by the General Assembly of the United Nations as per the Resolution No. 1514 and 1654, among others, of the General Assembly, several colonial countries have became independent.

4.10. In its statements, Government of India has seemingly committed itself to promote de-colonisation process outside India, while it remains an active colonial or hegemonic power by swallowing up all the smaller countries like Manipur one after another.

4.11. The Government of India is under international obligation to withdraw its reservation to Article 1 of the International Government on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, which provides for the fight of the people to self-determination. Following Vienna Declaration on Human Rights in 1993, the world community has re-affirmed the validity of the rights of the people to self-determination. We also take note that the Government of India withholds the inalienable right of the people to self-determination by continuously obstructing the legitimate aspiration of the colonised country and subjugated people in several ways and methods in order to perpetuate its colonial regime for eternally subjugating the people of Manipur. The Colonial Government of India has projected to the outside world the legitimate aspiration of the people of Manipur and their struggle for the national liberation as merely law and order problem or India’s internal affair.

4.12. The colonial, racist, alien administrating power — the Government of India- has, by its illegitimate annexation of the fully sovereign and independent Manipur in 1949, committed aggressive siege, retained occupation army till today, subjugated the people and violated its international responsibility which it has committed to fulfil and honour for the sake of maintaining peace and security in the world.

V. PRAYER

5.1. We, the following representatives of the Revolutionary People’s Front of Manipur, while drawing the prompt attention of the world authority and the International Regime under the United Nations to the above-cited historical materials, the ongoing colonial oppression and subjugation of all the people of Manipur by the alien Indian racist regime fervently pray the UN De-Colonisation Committee to kindly hold its sessions at Imphal, the capital city of the State of Manipur, in order to investigate the colonisation of Manipur as presented above.

5.2. We further pray De-colonisation Committee to kindly monitor, examine and evaluate the historical materials, documents, records and the treaties, as enclosed and to monitor the prejudicial activities of the colonial regime of India, and determine/ascertain the exact geographical territory of India as on 15th August 1947, the day on which India became independent by calling for records from colonial power of India.

5.3. We also pray your offices to kindly extend the United Nations’ recognition to the national liberation movement of Manipur, for representation in all the UN Agencies.

5.4. We further request you to kindly give UN recognition to the suspended sovereignty of Manipur which is attributed to India’s annexation thereof in 1949 and to supervise all the other activities relating to colonisation of Manipur under any pretext.

5.5. We further beseech the UN De-Colonisation Committee to kindly and promptly:

A. Seek suitable means for the immediate and full implementation of UN General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) in Manipur whose two millennia old continuous sovereignty has been suspended following India Annexation of Manipur on the 15th October, 1949 and subsequent military occupation till today,

B. Report the Colonisation of Manipur by India to the General Assembly,

C. Send Visiting Missions to Manipur in order to enable Manipur to exercise its inalienable right to self-determination at the earliest,

D. Take all necessary steps to enlist World-Wide support among Government and all the national and international organisation for the de-colonisation of Manipur from the India Colonial Regime and India Racist Military occupation of Manipur within a UN prescribed Time Table, and

E. Apprise the UN Security Council of the developments that result in threatening international peace and security by the prejudicial Indian Military activities in Manipur within the Asian region of the global community.

SIGNATORIES:

Dated this 11th day of December 1996.